2- The Shas party is considered Ultra-Right, having a more powerful, more Centre-Right Party them out in a coalition, forcing them to concede some of their more extreme points.

3- The Khmer Rouge is not a 'Khmer insurgency' but a group in the Cambodian Civil War, who fight against, I don't know, other Khmers. Your laudable attempt to fit your ethno-centric view of history have no fall short upon this point. So the French revolution is a French insurgency against...other French folks. Universal condemnation of Abu Gharib in the UN is not enough? Nor is the universal condemnation of Gautanemo?

4-Anti-Israel is not Anti-Semitism.

5-I don't know how to drive it into you-- Taiwan is China, although it belongs to a different government. Their passport have the words 中華民國 (Zhong Hua Min Guo) emblazoned upon them, which basically translate to 'Chinese Republic' (min being populace, common people, and guo being country).

At least concede the last point, and, being weary, I will just agree that our positions are, as of now, irreconcilable.

1. Ok. For you, Palestinians fired rockets is intentional to kill civilians, while Israelis bombing areas is considered as accident and for peace purpose. I understand.

2. I actually don't have problem whether which side has more power as long as they don't harm other people. But we all know that Shas as Ultra-Orthodox Jews have an agenda to claim their promised lands without slight care to Palestinians. If they give Palestinians the same rights as Israelis, then nobody will complaint.

3. It is. Isn't that the meaning of insurgency? A civil fight between your own people. Like Civil war in America, Americans were fighting against Americans, weren't they? Do you think it's enough to stop the practice? Even when the world condemn it, the illegal abduction and torture still happening and no international organizations brave enough to investigate it. If UN is not a puppet of western governments, what it could else be?

4. I agreed. Semitic is referring to Akkadian, Amharic, Arabic, Aramaic, Ge'ez, Hebrew languages, etc. Means Arab is also semitic. But does that have something to do with our discussion?

5. Well, they want independence and they want Taiwan as their name. Passport doesn't matter since they haven't been recognized. It's the same when they used Olympic flag, not China's flag during Olympic in Beijing. As someone said, it's Rebel Province and they ant independence.

2- The Shas party is considered Ultra-Right, having a more powerful, more Centre-Right Party them out in a coalition, forcing them to concede some of their more extreme points.

3- The Khmer Rouge is not a 'Khmer insurgency' but a group in the Cambodian Civil War, who fight against, I don't know, other Khmers. Your laudable attempt to fit your ethno-centric view of history have no fall short upon this point. So the French revolution is a French insurgency against...other French folks. Universal condemnation of Abu Gharib in the UN is not enough? Nor is the universal condemnation of Gautanemo?

4-Anti-Israel is not Anti-Semitism.

5-I don't know how to drive it into you-- Taiwan is China, although it belongs to a different government. Their passport have the words 中華民國 (Zhong Hua Min Guo) emblazoned upon them, which basically translate to 'Chinese Republic' (min being populace, common people, and guo being country).

At least concede the last point, and, being weary, I will just agree that our positions are, as of now, irreconcilable.

1. Ok. For you, Palestinians fired rockets is intentional to kill civilians, while Israelis bombing areas is considered as accident and for peace purpose. I understand.

2. I actually don't have problem whether which side has more power as long as they don't harm other people. But we all know that Shas as Ultra-Orthodox Jews have an agenda to claim their promised lands without slight care to Palestinians. If they give Palestinians the same rights as Israelis, then nobody will complaint.

3. It is. Isn't that the meaning of insurgency? A civil fight between your own people. Like Civil war in America, Americans were fighting against Americans, weren't they? Do you think it's enough to stop the practice? Even when the world condemn it, the illegal abduction and torture still happening and no international organizations brave enough to investigate it. If UN is not a puppet of western governments, what it could else be?

4. I agreed. Semitic is referring to Akkadian, Amharic, Arabic, Aramaic, Ge'ez, Hebrew languages, etc. Means Arab is also semitic. But does that have something to do with our discussion?

5. Well, they want independence and they want Taiwan as their name. Passport doesn't matter since they haven't been recognized. It's the same when they used Olympic flag, not China's flag during Olympic in Beijing. As someone said, it's Rebel Province and they ant independence.

I agreed. I don't like being biased.

1- I did not say all Palestinians, I am only saying that the so called 'freedom fighters' do so.

2- Palestinians are not Israelis, nor do they want to be. Israeli-Arabs, on the other hand, arguably have the same rights as an Israeli Jew.

3- In the loosest of terms. You make it out to be an ethnic insurgency, inspired by ethnic oppression. But, Pol Pot wasn't exactly 100% Khmer (according to some accounts, I forget where, he is part Chinese on his mother's side).

4- Anti-Semitic, as in, Anti-Judaism.

5- The Flag of Taiwan is the Flag of the Republic of China. And a majority of Taiwanese agree that they are Chinese, they are part of China, &c. If Taiwan had a coalition of nations, united under the banner of 'liberating the mainland' from Communist, then I doubt the pro-Taiwanese independence would quickly amend their position.

1- I did not say all Palestinians, I am only saying that the so called 'freedom fighters' do so.

2- Palestinians are not Israelis, nor do they want to be. Israeli-Arabs, on the other hand, arguably have the same rights as an Israeli Jew.

3- In the loosest of terms. You make it out to be an ethnic insurgency, inspired by ethnic oppression. But, Pol Pot wasn't exactly 100% Khmer (according to some accounts, I forget where, he is part Chinese on his mother's side).

4- Anti-Semitic, as in, Anti-Judaism.

5- The Flag of Taiwan is the Flag of the Republic of China. And a majority of Taiwanese agree that they are Chinese, they are part of China, &c. If Taiwan had a coalition of nations, united under the banner of 'liberating the mainland' from Communist, then I doubt the pro-Taiwanese independence would quickly amend their position.

1. Yes, those insurgency groups are killing everyone, right? Without peace purpose in their mind and they're terrorist for demanding their rights.

5. Yes, Taiwan's flag is the Republic of China, not the People's Republic of China. It's different, I guarantee you. If you have meet Taiwanese, you won't say Taiwanese claimed themselves as part of China. Only ethically, like Singaporeans or Chinese-Americans.

1- I did not say all Palestinians, I am only saying that the so called 'freedom fighters' do so.

2- Palestinians are not Israelis, nor do they want to be. Israeli-Arabs, on the other hand, arguably have the same rights as an Israeli Jew.

3- In the loosest of terms. You make it out to be an ethnic insurgency, inspired by ethnic oppression. But, Pol Pot wasn't exactly 100% Khmer (according to some accounts, I forget where, he is part Chinese on his mother's side).

4- Anti-Semitic, as in, Anti-Judaism.

5- The Flag of Taiwan is the Flag of the Republic of China. And a majority of Taiwanese agree that they are Chinese, they are part of China, &c. If Taiwan had a coalition of nations, united under the banner of 'liberating the mainland' from Communist, then I doubt the pro-Taiwanese independence would quickly amend their position.

1. Yes, those insurgency groups are killing everyone, right? Without peace purpose in their mind and they're terrorist for demanding their rights.

5. Yes, Taiwan's flag is the Republic of China, not the People's Republic of China. It's different, I guarantee you. If you have meet Taiwanese, you won't say Taiwanese claimed themselves as part of China. Only ethically, like Singaporeans or Chinese-Americans.

1- They can protest peacefully, convince people in Israel to support candidates who have more sympathy for their cause, &c., basically working the Israeli democratic system. Instead, they decides 'Oh, less make ourselves more villainous and damn our brothers by blowing ourselves up and killing civilians for the hell of it.' Martin Luther King and Gandhi were freedom fighters, these people are just terrorist thugs.

2- Well, then they are not protected by Israeli law, and do not have Israeli rights, on account of the fact that they are, I don't know, citizen of a separate nation. They are not even ruled by the government of Israel. It is like saying that Americans should extend their legislative authority to China, which they have no control over, pure non-sense.

3- You are trying to make it into some ethnic insurgency--I am just saying that there is nothing ethnic about the Khmer rouge.

4- This is due to a mistake on my part, and I apologize. It mistakenly read a continuation of your answer to question number three as your response to question number four. Just because there exist Jews in Iran, doesn't mean that its government doesn't want to bomb Israel repeatedly with nuclear weapons.

5- I can slowly explain the history of modern China, which you will find rather boring, or give you a brief synopsis:

1Sun Yat-sen and his followers overthrew the Qing Dynasty and establish the Republic of China

2Yuan Shi-kai comes about, and becomes president

3Yuan tries to abolish the National Assembly, and declares himself Emperor

4He was unpopular, and many people disregarded him. He dies, and China becomes split into territories ruled by Warlords.

1- They can protest peacefully, convince people in Israel to support candidates who have more sympathy for their cause, &c., basically working the Israeli democratic system. Instead, they decides 'Oh, less make ourselves more villainous and damn our brothers by blowing ourselves up and killing civilians for the hell of it.' Martin Luther King and Gandhi were freedom fighters, these people are just terrorist thugs.

2- Well, then they are not protected by Israeli law, and do not have Israeli rights, on account of the fact that they are, I don't know, citizen of a separate nation. They are not even ruled by the government of Israel. It is like saying that Americans should extend their legislative authority to China, which they have no control over, pure non-sense.

3- You are trying to make it into some ethnic insurgency--I am just saying that there is nothing ethnic about the Khmer rouge.

4- This is due to a mistake on my part, and I apologize. It mistakenly read a continuation of your answer to question number three as your response to question number four. Just because there exist Jews in Iran, doesn't mean that its government doesn't want to bomb Israel repeatedly with nuclear weapons.

5- I can slowly explain the history of modern China, which you will find rather boring, or give you a brief synopsis:

1Sun Yat-sen and his followers overthrew the Qing Dynasty and establish the Republic of China

2Yuan Shi-kai comes about, and becomes president

3Yuan tries to abolish the National Assembly, and declares himself Emperor

4He was unpopular, and many people disregarded him. He dies, and China becomes split into territories ruled by Warlords.

1. They are have been protesting peacefully in many parts of West Banks and Jerusalem too, for over than 50 years. They often opposed the UN said as illegal settlements on Palestinian lands in West Banks, and do you think Israel has listen to this international call?. They're struggling with weapon and voice. In America, promoting rights for blacks were carried out by both violence and protest too, right? The biggest war in American's history. That's what happened when we have oppressive government. They are freedom fighters, both by weapon and voice.

2. Of course, they want to have their own rights. But that's not possible under Israel. Israel was the one who prevent it by blockading them. They're separate nation, exactly like you said. Then, why this particular nation barging in to another nation's business? It's like Americans wanted to rise up the tensions between Taiwan and China by selling weapons to Taiwan.

3. You divert the topic. Insurgency is rebellion, it doesn't matter what caused it, whether from foreign influence or inner.

4. Well, what Iranian's President said is not merely attacking Israel or Israelis. Precisely, the regime that authorizes Jerusalem and its surrounding. It's the same as in colonization and imperialism in world war and before that. Since we now have UN and international laws, not like hundred years ago, we have to obliged to follow the rules to not occupy illegal lands.

5. Pretty much like what happened in Shanghai and Hongkong by British, the thing both of areas had been compromised to have autonomy to govern themselves for 50 years and it'll be brought back to Chinese government. Whereas there is no agreement between Taiwan and China. It's like cold war between North and South Korea. You should ask Taiwanese and ask their opinions about this, I've met one Taiwanese and he said, they want to be independence. While the Chinese I met said, Taiwan is the part of China. So different sides leads to different opinions, the same as Palestinians and Israel. By time, both should recognized their own sovereignty.

1- They can protest peacefully, convince people in Israel to support candidates who have more sympathy for their cause, &c., basically working the Israeli democratic system. Instead, they decides 'Oh, less make ourselves more villainous and damn our brothers by blowing ourselves up and killing civilians for the hell of it.' Martin Luther King and Gandhi were freedom fighters, these people are just terrorist thugs.

2- Well, then they are not protected by Israeli law, and do not have Israeli rights, on account of the fact that they are, I don't know, citizen of a separate nation. They are not even ruled by the government of Israel. It is like saying that Americans should extend their legislative authority to China, which they have no control over, pure non-sense.

3- You are trying to make it into some ethnic insurgency--I am just saying that there is nothing ethnic about the Khmer rouge.

4- This is due to a mistake on my part, and I apologize. It mistakenly read a continuation of your answer to question number three as your response to question number four. Just because there exist Jews in Iran, doesn't mean that its government doesn't want to bomb Israel repeatedly with nuclear weapons.

5- I can slowly explain the history of modern China, which you will find rather boring, or give you a brief synopsis:

1Sun Yat-sen and his followers overthrew the Qing Dynasty and establish the Republic of China

2Yuan Shi-kai comes about, and becomes president

3Yuan tries to abolish the National Assembly, and declares himself Emperor

4He was unpopular, and many people disregarded him. He dies, and China becomes split into territories ruled by Warlords.

1. They are have been protesting peacefully in many parts of West Banks and Jerusalem too, for over than 50 years. They often opposed the UN said as illegal settlements on Palestinian lands in West Banks, and do you think Israel has listen to this international call?. They're struggling with weapon and voice. In America, promoting rights for blacks were carried out by both violence and protest too, right? The biggest war in American's history. That's what happened when we have oppressive government. They are freedom fighters, both by weapon and voice.

2. Of course, they want to have their own rights. But that's not possible under Israel. Israel was the one who prevent it by blockading them. They're separate nation, exactly like you said. Then, why this particular nation barging in to another nation's business? It's like Americans wanted to rise up the tensions between Taiwan and China by selling weapons to Taiwan.

3. You divert the topic. Insurgency is rebellion, it doesn't matter what caused it, whether from foreign influence or inner.

4. Well, what Iranian's President said is not merely attacking Israel or Israelis. Precisely, the regime that authorizes Jerusalem and its surrounding. It's the same as in colonization and imperialism in world war and before that. Since we now have UN and international laws, not like hundred years ago, we have to obliged to follow the rules to not occupy illegal lands.

5. Pretty much like what happened in Shanghai and Hongkong by British, the thing both of areas had been compromised to have autonomy to govern themselves for 50 years and it'll be brought back to Chinese government. Whereas there is no agreement between Taiwan and China. It's like cold war between North and South Korea. You should ask Taiwanese and ask their opinions about this, I've met one Taiwanese and he said, they want to be independence. While the Chinese I met said, Taiwan is the part of China. So different sides leads to different opinions, the same as Palestinians and Israel. By time, both should recognized their own sovereignty.

1- There you go--if they want to help their people, they should follow the example of Gandhi and MLK, instead of going around with bombs and killing the innocents. Israel has a democratic system (which is more than what we may say for any other Mid-East Country). It can be liken to America's previous efforts in Iraq to win the people's hearts and mind, and, I assure you, it is quite hard to win either their hearts or their minds when they see their children bloody and missing several limbs.

2- Well, its America's right to sell weapons to Taiwan, and it is China's right to be angry. I don't see what is wrong with that situation or the situation with those Palestinians. When a nation is at war with another, it is fair to use all means necessary to accomplish their goals. I am sure that having six nations attack a single, newly formed, and mostly disjointed nation on the holy day of Yom Kippur would be, in your eyes, 'fair' while Israel besieging her enemies, who wish them nothing but harm and death, is 'not fair'.

3- It is an insurgency, not an ethnic one, and therefore should not be clumped in with the likes of 'the Tamil Tiger' and such.

4- I am sure 'Death to Israel' is not at all showing his aggression toward Israel, nor the fact that he invited Holocaust Deniers to attend his special convention.

5- Wrong on two counts- Shanghai was never British (International territory) nor can the situation in HK be liken to this. Taiwan is China, geographically and politically, Taiwan is a separate government, but one that claims to be legitimate, and should American have never recognised the legitimacy of the PRC, as oppose to the ROC, then Britain would surely have returned HK to the government of the ROC. If you reviewed your history, above, you would see that Taiwan never was independent from China.

Also, reviewing the political and historical background, you can see there is no similarity between these two conflict.

1- There you go--if they want to help their people, they should follow the example of Gandhi and MLK, instead of going around with bombs and killing the innocents. Israel has a democratic system (which is more than what we may say for any other Mid-East Country). It can be liken to America's previous efforts in Iraq to win the people's hearts and mind, and, I assure you, it is quite hard to win either their hearts or their minds when they see their children bloody and missing several limbs.

2- Well, its America's right to sell weapons to Taiwan, and it is China's right to be angry. I don't see what is wrong with that situation or the situation with those Palestinians. When a nation is at war with another, it is fair to use all means necessary to accomplish their goals. I am sure that having six nations attack a single, newly formed, and mostly disjointed nation on the holy day of Yom Kippur would be, in your eyes, 'fair' while Israel besieging her enemies, who wish them nothing but harm and death, is 'not fair'.

3- It is an insurgency, not an ethnic one, and therefore should not be clumped in with the likes of 'the Tamil Tiger' and such.

4- I am sure 'Death to Israel' is not at all showing his aggression toward Israel, nor the fact that he invited Holocaust Deniers to attend his special convention.

5- Wrong on two counts- Shanghai was never British (International territory) nor can the situation in HK be liken to this. Taiwan is China, geographically and politically, Taiwan is a separate government, but one that claims to be legitimate, and should American have never recognised the legitimacy of the PRC, as oppose to the ROC, then Britain would surely have returned HK to the government of the ROC. If you reviewed your history, above, you would see that Taiwan never was independent from China.

Also, reviewing the political and historical background, you can see there is no similarity between these two conflict.

1. Do you think MLK and Gandhi did not encounter violence in their protest? They were having wars against laws and colonization. Even so, they're being supported by their own people for preserving their rights. Do Americans soldier being loved in Iraq now? For fighting for Iraqis and said to liberate them from Saddam's regime? What they have is instability there without future. If Israel and Americans governments are really willing to have peace, then they should really mean it with their actions.

2. Well, anything to America's wants and needs, you don't object. But if it's Syria's rights to give SCUD to Hizbullah, China's rights to support North Korean to have nuclear arms, Russia's intervention to oppose nuclear defense missile, it's all American's concern and all of them are wrong? I didn't support the Six-Day War as it's breach the international laws, and those arab nations did it for their own profits. It's a cowardly acts. They deserved to be beaten.

3. It seems you mistaken me for saying it's about ethnic. I could care less about ethnic, as long as there is insurgency, there is always rebellion to their government.

4. It's because they used the name of Israel. Where we acknowledged Israel when they under Moses or Solomon. They used Jews and Israel names to justify their actions, where it's actually far from Jewish teachings.

5. My purpose is by comparing those regions with Taiwan, when Hongkong had agreements with China's governments to be part of them, whereas Taiwan never had agreements to be part of China, internationally. Maybe this what China will experience the same thing as Soviet.

1- There you go--if they want to help their people, they should follow the example of Gandhi and MLK, instead of going around with bombs and killing the innocents. Israel has a democratic system (which is more than what we may say for any other Mid-East Country). It can be liken to America's previous efforts in Iraq to win the people's hearts and mind, and, I assure you, it is quite hard to win either their hearts or their minds when they see their children bloody and missing several limbs.

2- Well, its America's right to sell weapons to Taiwan, and it is China's right to be angry. I don't see what is wrong with that situation or the situation with those Palestinians. When a nation is at war with another, it is fair to use all means necessary to accomplish their goals. I am sure that having six nations attack a single, newly formed, and mostly disjointed nation on the holy day of Yom Kippur would be, in your eyes, 'fair' while Israel besieging her enemies, who wish them nothing but harm and death, is 'not fair'.

3- It is an insurgency, not an ethnic one, and therefore should not be clumped in with the likes of 'the Tamil Tiger' and such.

4- I am sure 'Death to Israel' is not at all showing his aggression toward Israel, nor the fact that he invited Holocaust Deniers to attend his special convention.

5- Wrong on two counts- Shanghai was never British (International territory) nor can the situation in HK be liken to this. Taiwan is China, geographically and politically, Taiwan is a separate government, but one that claims to be legitimate, and should American have never recognised the legitimacy of the PRC, as oppose to the ROC, then Britain would surely have returned HK to the government of the ROC. If you reviewed your history, above, you would see that Taiwan never was independent from China.

Also, reviewing the political and historical background, you can see there is no similarity between these two conflict.

1. Do you think MLK and Gandhi did not encounter violence in their protest? They were having wars against laws and colonization. Even so, they're being supported by their own people for preserving their rights. Do Americans soldier being loved in Iraq now? For fighting for Iraqis and said to liberate them from Saddam's regime? What they have is instability there without future. If Israel and Americans governments are really willing to have peace, then they should really mean it with their actions.

2. Well, anything to America's wants and needs, you don't object. But if it's Syria's rights to give SCUD to Hizbullah, China's rights to support North Korean to have nuclear arms, Russia's intervention to oppose nuclear defense missile, it's all American's concern and all of them are wrong? I didn't support the Six-Day War as it's breach the international laws, and those arab nations did it for their own profits. It's a cowardly acts. They deserved to be beaten.

3. It seems you mistaken me for saying it's about ethnic. I could care less about ethnic, as long as there is insurgency, there is always rebellion to their government.

4. It's because they used the name of Israel. Where we acknowledged Israel when they under Moses or Solomon. They used Jews and Israel names to justify their actions, where it's actually far from Jewish teachings.

5. My purpose is by comparing those regions with Taiwan, when Hongkong had agreements with China's governments to be part of them, whereas Taiwan never had agreements to be part of China, internationally. Maybe this what China will experience the same thing as Soviet.

1- Of course they encountered violence, they just brush it off, making it effective propaganda for their cause, the violent authorities against the poor, non-violent protesters. They did not go about bombing themselves in crowded places full of civilians and bombing grade-schools for the laughs and such. But, I guess different culture have different ways of protesting, the Moslem way is probably killing as many people as possible.

2- Syria is not allowed to do so because they are a recognised Terrorist group, but, if China wants to support N. Korea, and wait as the Koreans bite the hand that feeds, it is their right.

3- How is this related to Israel, between two belligerent nations? It is not insurgency, it is war.

4- That doesn't explain anything--so they recognise that Israel existed, and that the current isn't the real Israel and so should be bombed the hell out of. Was this suppose to make sense?

5- No, the British Government had a deal with China, not HK, and further more, Taiwan doesn't have any agreement with China, seeing that it is, indeed, China, was won back from the two foreign powers that colonised it, namely the Dutch and the Japanese, and so, is under no special agreement. HK was lent to the British Government for 99 years, during which point, they promptly returned it to China. So there is still no comparison. It is like saying that Yorkshire is not part of Britain because there is no special agreement between the County Yorkshire and the British Government. Taiwan is Chinese, it is part of China, and it will always be.

Also, concerning your statement, that most Taiwanese prefer it if they were a separate country: The KMT (The party that support reunification under the flag of the ROC) majority in Parliament and the KMT presidency begs to differ.

1- Of course they encountered violence, they just brush it off, making it effective propaganda for their cause, the violent authorities against the poor, non-violent protesters. They did not go about bombing themselves in crowded places full of civilians and bombing grade-schools for the laughs and such. But, I guess different culture have different ways of protesting, the Moslem way is probably killing as many people as possible.

2- Syria is not allowed to do so because they are a recognised Terrorist group, but, if China wants to support N. Korea, and wait as the Koreans bite the hand that feeds, it is their right.

3- How is this related to Israel, between two belligerent nations? It is not insurgency, it is war.

4- That doesn't explain anything--so they recognise that Israel existed, and that the current isn't the real Israel and so should be bombed the hell out of. Was this suppose to make sense?

5- No, the British Government had a deal with China, not HK, and further more, Taiwan doesn't have any agreement with China, seeing that it is, indeed, China, was won back from the two foreign powers that colonised it, namely the Dutch and the Japanese, and so, is under no special agreement. HK was lent to the British Government for 99 years, during which point, they promptly returned it to China. So there is still no comparison. It is like saying that Yorkshire is not part of Britain because there is no special agreement between the County Yorkshire and the British Government. Taiwan is Chinese, it is part of China, and it will always be.

Also, concerning your statement, that most Taiwanese prefer it if they were a separate country: The KMT (The party that support reunification under the flag of the ROC) majority in Parliament and the KMT presidency begs to differ.

1. So MLK and Gandhi were terrorist by your definition. Even suicide is illegal in Islam, moreover suicide bombing that kills civilians who has nothing to do with them. They often mistakenly as 'sacrifice' in middle age. We have discussed it here before. That's your biased towards muslims, when you have no knowledge about it.

2. Read world map, where is Syria? It's country, not group duh.

3. It's two nations that fighting for occupation, it's insurgency in the same area. Different if they are not in the same area.

4. As Israel bombing Palestine as well, as the ultra-orthodox Jews don't recognize Palestine either and build illegal settlement as well. You diverting the topic, to the extend of ignorant. The same as Hamas for not recognizing Israel.

5. Yes, with British as representative. Talk with Taiwanese and you get your response.

As I stated earlier, the lands of Jerusalem and its surrounding are should be lived with both of sides, whether it's Israeli, Palestinians, Jews, Muslims or Christian. The land of the world belongs to everyone through legal agreement, it's my stance. I think it's futile to continuing if you still biased and not talking about the solution for both.

1- Of course they encountered violence, they just brush it off, making it effective propaganda for their cause, the violent authorities against the poor, non-violent protesters. They did not go about bombing themselves in crowded places full of civilians and bombing grade-schools for the laughs and such. But, I guess different culture have different ways of protesting, the Moslem way is probably killing as many people as possible.

2- Syria is not allowed to do so because they are a recognised Terrorist group, but, if China wants to support N. Korea, and wait as the Koreans bite the hand that feeds, it is their right.

3- How is this related to Israel, between two belligerent nations? It is not insurgency, it is war.

4- That doesn't explain anything--so they recognise that Israel existed, and that the current isn't the real Israel and so should be bombed the hell out of. Was this suppose to make sense?

5- No, the British Government had a deal with China, not HK, and further more, Taiwan doesn't have any agreement with China, seeing that it is, indeed, China, was won back from the two foreign powers that colonised it, namely the Dutch and the Japanese, and so, is under no special agreement. HK was lent to the British Government for 99 years, during which point, they promptly returned it to China. So there is still no comparison. It is like saying that Yorkshire is not part of Britain because there is no special agreement between the County Yorkshire and the British Government. Taiwan is Chinese, it is part of China, and it will always be.

Also, concerning your statement, that most Taiwanese prefer it if they were a separate country: The KMT (The party that support reunification under the flag of the ROC) majority in Parliament and the KMT presidency begs to differ.

1. So MLK and Gandhi were terrorist by your definition. Even suicide is illegal in Islam, moreover suicide bombing that kills civilians who has nothing to do with them. They often mistakenly as 'sacrifice' in middle age. We have discussed it here before. That's your biased towards muslims, when you have no knowledge about it.

2. Read world map, where is Syria? It's country, not group duh.

3. It's two nations that fighting for occupation, it's insurgency in the same area. Different if they are not in the same area.

4. As Israel bombing Palestine as well, as the ultra-orthodox Jews don't recognize Palestine either and build illegal settlement as well. You diverting the topic, to the extend of ignorant. The same as Hamas for not recognizing Israel.

5. Yes, with British as representative. Talk with Taiwanese and you get your response.

As I stated earlier, the lands of Jerusalem and its surrounding are should be lived with both of sides, whether it's Israeli, Palestinians, Jews, Muslims or Christian. The land of the world belongs to everyone through legal agreement, it's my stance. I think it's futile to continuing if you still biased and not talking about the solution for both.

1- They are not terrorist in the fact that they do not act in violence with the intention of inspiring terror, and, quite the contrary, use the terror tactics of the government against them. Palestinian Terrorist, on the other hand, well, they just kill to scare people. The Unabomber is not a moslem, but is still a terrorist because he acted with the intention of inspiring terror through violence. It is not a difficult concept to comprehend.

2- It was poorly worded on my part, so I apologise: Hezbollah is the group in mention and Syria does not have the right to give them weapons because Hezbollah is a terrorist group.

3- Insurgency=rebellion, the situation with Palestine and Israel is more properly classified as a 'war betwixt two separate nations'.

4- Is coherency too much to ask from you? You mentioned some jargon about 'bombs' and 'hamas', and still, you manage to clarify nothing.

5- Taiwan has no agreement because it is China- it was colonised only twice by a foreign power, that is to say, the Dutch and the Japanese, and have been recovered under the Chinese flag before the Chinese Civil War. The fact speaks plainly-Taiwan is indeed 'Chinese', and not a separate independent political entity. It is not 'lent' like Hong Kong, and it is Chinese, and that independence, while it is a movement in Taiwan, is not a particularly popular one, considering the KMT's seat in Parliament and the fact that there is a KMT president, whose quote concerning Taiwan I already furnished. Most Taiwanese do not seek independence, and most wish to remain 'Chinese', under the flag of the 'Republic of China'. It is not a difficult concept, and certainly not at all parallel in the slightest to Israel and Palestine.

Israel is a land compose of both Christian, Moslem, and Jews, inhabited by Israelis on account that it is Israeli land. That is the legal premise, that is the contract, that this land belongs to this nation, and therefore be settled by citizens of said nation and only of said nation. The is the legal agreement that all the world adheres to, and should be no different with Israel. Palestine have their own land, and that is inhabited by its own citizenry. My stance-they are two different nation, and therefore, Israeli grounds should not be shared for inhabitance with citizens of foreign nations.

As I said, concede the last point-that you are wrong in every respect concerning it, and I will cease this meaningless platter with you.

To be fair, and unlike the person you're debating. I'll concede a point and agree there's a VAGUE (very vague) parallel between the Republic of China and Those claiming their nationality as Palestinian.

Brushing aside ethnic issues which are thick on the ground in Isreal but not so much in china. brushing aside the RoC's recognition or lack as a nation in the eyes of the world, (ditto for Palestine)...

In Both situations you have a .... you know what.... I changed my mind.

the paralell is so vague contrived and full of conditionals that it's easier to say their not related at all.